Dear Politician ...

[maat55]

All I am saying is that many people are going to lose their jobs that catered to the "Jones" - our whole economy is based on giving the Jones the goods and services they want.

I'll answer the tough questions when SCFR, (I know what DisneySteve does), and Maat tell me what they do for a living.

I custom build and reupholster furniture for interior designers. The problem is today that everyone thinks they should have what the Jone's have, and now.

A sad truth in life is that not everyone in the world can have the technology that exists. One hundred years ago, nobody could have a MRI. Just because something exist does not mean everyone is intitled to it. Capitalism provides ways to spread the cost, but the government has no business taking from one to give to another.

Capitalism is supposed to find ways to make things more affordable for the masses, IMO, government is getting in the way of this process.

[Scanner]

Maat,

Okay, respectable work. . .honest work. . .now. . .let's say you have 10 interior designers who call on you (I assume you are self-employed or a small business or work for a small firm).

Now. . .well, because the Jones aren't doing as much interior decorating anymore, 3 of the upper middle class interior designers have gone out of business. They can't serve the Jones anymore because they don't have any credit for $6000 chairs and $4000 armoirs.

Your work drops by 30%.

But you are okay with this, right? Because in a way, you were adding fuel to the fire by serving the Jones indirectly, right?

Just want to make sure everyone is okay when their income drops by 30-100% that we are at least a "principled" nation.

DisneySteve,

I think you are grossly underestimating how much your business would be hurt by a cash economy. Sure we all need family doctors but as you know, you practice in a poor, urban area. That means Mediciad. In a true "fend-for-yourself" cash economy, people would just go without your healthcare.

My estimate - your business drops off by 50%, not increases slightly.

This is getting um. . .complex, isn't it?

Listen, I sort of agree here. . .I am only ragging on you a bit because I haven't ruled out politics for myself someday (a fantasy at this point). If I got a letter like the OP, I would send a form letter back saying, "Oh yeah, you go girl(guy!). We need more Americans like you." (pander to my voter) but then go back to trying to figure out what the real problem is.

I think the real problem hasn't necessarily been raw overconsumption but rather the lack of partnership between banks/lenders and borrowers. It's okay to loan money to go out and get some furniture and curtains. . .I am not sure it should be done without a plan on how such lending brings back an upwardly mobile lifestyle that everyone can benefit from.

I guess I see more and more now that we need borrowers as much as we need savers.

We have to figure out as a country how we can do both.

[Scanner]

Let me actually give you a more realistic scenario, DisneySteve. . .Medicaid in NJ is actually outsourced I beleive to a private contractor/ins. co., right? Unisys?

Well, we all know insurance companies rely on credit for their month to month operations - paying claims out vs. taking premiums in.

If Unisys were to collapse, you would be okay with that, right? You could just pay the bills and your salary on the cash people pay for healthcare, right?

Hey, the thought has crossed my mind myself - should I be taking insurance from patients after what happened to AIG?

[scfr]

Scanner -

With all due respect ...

The problem I have with your arguments is that I do not see you making a distinction between borrowers who pay back what they owe and those who do not. I have no beef with people who borrow and pay back. I do have a beef with people who do not pay their debts. Lumping all borrowers, whether they pay their debts or not, together is like comparing me to Wesley Snipes because we are both US citizens who are required by law to pay income taxes. The difference is that I pay mine and he didn't. We are not the same. And the difference between him & I is not a small difference. It is huge.

By buying what they could not afford, The Jonses encouraged businesses to expand beyond a sustainable level. By not paying what they owe, The Jonses have contributed to the current reluctance of lenders to loan money. By asking us to bail them out, they opened the door for us to ask that they demonstrate financial responsibility going forward.

By them buying unnecessary stuff and asking for a bailout (in other words asking all of us to pay for it), IMO they are no different than someone who hacks in to all of our bank accounts and withdraws a few bucks from each just because they want it. If that hacker is caught but then let go, is it not reasonable for all of us to ask for some sort of assurance that s/he is contrite and will not do it again?

[disneysteve]

Scanner, there is a chiropractor in my area who accepts no insurance. He also has no office staff - just him. He charges $10 for a visit. He's got more business that he can possibly handle. People are happy to pay $10 to see him, even in a relatively low income area.

If your scenario were to happen and my business dropped off sharply, what could I do? I could cut my office staff since there wouldn't be a mountain of paperwork, referrals, authorizations, insurance claims and other nonsense to deal with. That would reduce my overhead significantly. In addition, I wouldn't be wasting several hours per week doing all that insurance company paperwork, filling out forms and such (which brings in zero income), so I could spend more time actually treating patients which would help boost income, even if I was charging less for a visit that we do now.

It is complex for sure.

[disneysteve]

It's okay to loan money to go out and get some furniture and curtains. . .I am not sure it should be done without a plan on how such lending brings back an upwardly mobile lifestyle that everyone can benefit from.

I guess I see more and more now that we need borrowers as much as we need savers.

I actually don't have a problem with people borrowing to get certain things. I borrowed to pay for my education. I borrowed to buy my last car. We borrowed to buy our first computer. We borrowed to buy some of our furniture. I'm not totally opposed to personal debt at all.

What I am opposed to is people borrowing money irresponsibly. I'm opposed to people borrowing money that they can't afford to pay back. I'm opposed to the mentality some people have that if they can afford the minimum monthly payment, they can afford the purchase. I'm opposed to the way that lenders had relaxed their lending standards to give anyone with a pulse a loan regardless of their financials. These are the kinds of behaviors that got us into the current mess.

[maat55]

Maat,

Okay, respectable work. . .honest work. . .now. . .let's say you have 10 interior designers who call on you (I assume you are self-employed or a small business or work for a small firm).

Now. . .well, because the Jones aren't doing as much interior decorating anymore, 3 of the upper middle class interior designers have gone out of business. They can't serve the Jones anymore because they don't have any credit for $6000 chairs and $4000 armoirs.

Your work drops by 30%.

But you are okay with this, right? Because in a way, you were adding fuel to the fire by serving the Jones indirectly, right?

Just want to make sure everyone is okay when their income drops by 30-100% that we are at least a "principled" nation.

My work is not a right. If my work was to go away, I would have to adapt. I've learned in the last few years that my income is not guaranteed. I have to prepare for my problems.

We do not deserve everything we want because we exist. Capitalism has motivated the human spirit to achieve in ways socialism can never dream of. I like you wish that we lived in a perfect world, one where no tanks or fighter jets or bombs were made, but instead only things to serve humanity. We both want the same results, but disagree on how best to achieve the goal.

I'll agree to disagree.

[disgruntable]

The United States where you're free to do just about anything. You have the freedom to achieve greatness and you have the freedom to fail miserably. By "protecting" people from the latter, you prevent them from pursuing the former.

This freedom is what makes us great. We should not give it up lightly.

[Scanner]

DisneySteve,

Yes, I am well aware of many DC's who have made the transition from insurance to cash - I don't necessarily want to get into it but as you note, it means slashing the fee considerably (assuming an average fee in our area is $35-40/visit) by 2/3rds and hoping you can make it on volume.

If the whole chiro. market does that, it's a whole different ballgame. That chiropractor is appealing to a different segment of the market - somebody who wants a quick crack, a little interaction, and that's it. No judgment on that but I think what I am talking about is different - he is undercutting the current market.

Anyway, I like maat's reply. . .he would adapt.

In fact, going from an economy that has served the Jones, I do think we are all going to have to adapt.

And maybe I am just saying what you all are saying in a different way. When I went to apply for my business loan, I had a business plan all made up and went in ready to sell my banker. There was none of that - just fill out this form and I got 50K in credit (only needed 25K).

Now, I was grateful to get it at the time (back in 2001) but in a way I think the process robbed me of something valuable - having a "banker" to advise me in the process. I have had an accountant over the years. . .but never a banker. A banker has become nothing more than a person who helps you fill out the forms.

I think that will change.

[disneysteve]

When I went to apply for my business loan, I had a business plan all made up and went in ready to sell my banker. There was none of that - just fill out this form and I got 50K in credit (only needed 25K).

Now, I was grateful to get it at the time (back in 2001) but in a way I think the process robbed me of something valuable - having a "banker" to advise me in the process. I have had an accountant over the years. . .but never a banker. A banker has become nothing more than a person who helps you fill out the forms.

I believe it was Bob Hope who used to say that in order to get a loan, you need to go into the bank and prove to them that you don't need the money.

[GREENBACK]

This argument is not a new one and it does interest me a great deal. Should doctor visits be more like car repair for routine things? I know many folks (children as well) who go to the physician for minor ailments because of the minor co-pay. It would certainly be cheaper in the long run if this cheap affordable stuff were treated like an oil change or a headlight out. Many things are fixable at home but if you only pay $20 to go see doc, then why not. We have all created this system of easy come and easy go. Just my opinion

[Scanner]

Many things are fixable at home but if you only pay $20 to go see doc, then why not. We have all created this system of easy come and easy go. Just my opinion

Hey, I'm a doctor and even I get paranoid with my kids sometimes and go to the pediatrician for a cough or sniffle with my kids.

I don't think it's bad to pay for a diagnosis/reassurance that something you or your family has is viral/self-limiting.

So paying the doctor isn't bad. (my opinion)

If you want to use the car repair analogy, there's no better way to spend your money than to pay the mechanic to put your car up on the lift and say there is nothing wrong, no need to fix it.

However, Americans hate the idea of paying for diagnostics.

If the mechanic then says, "Well, your tires could use an alignment." then they are okay paying for that (intervention).

However, they expect the mechanic to "be nice" and not charge for the 15 minutes to put the car on the lift if he finds nothing wrong.

I have had to reign in my pediatrician a bit. . .he's gotten a lot better. I tell him, "Hey we are just here for a diagnosis. . .if you feel it's just a virus. . .we'll wait a week and come back. We don't need antibiotics to feel we got something out of the visit."

But the hapless pediatrician has to put up 99 other patients in his day who absolutely demand "intervention", not "education that this is self-limiting and requires rest and good nutrition."

So. . .anyway, yes, I say pay the doc his $20. . .but I suppose I am biased. Most Americans think doctors are driving yachts on their weekends off and if he does nothing, well, he doesn't deserve payment.

Sorry if I sound cynical and sensitive but we just having this conversation at my closed chiropractic forum. A colleague of mine in NYC had a 97 year old woman fall. He ordered x-rays and sure enough the shoulder was fractured and dislocated - he referred her to an orthopedist with films for her to carry.

He sent her a bill for $15 for the copay and she wrote a note back on the bill,

"Here is your $15 for the office visit but I must say I was surprised to get a bill since you did nothing. But thank you for the referral to Dr. Ortho."

She's 97. . .so he's letting "it go" but it demonstrates pretty well where American's heads are at.

In fact, I have become convinced lately there is actually nothing wrong with our healthcare system. I think the system is just fine. It's American's health and views on health that is bad and no system can accomodate it, social or capitalistic.

Sorry for the tangent. ..

[maat55]

I've always been a tough it out guy. I've seen a Doc maybe twice in twenty years, with the exclusion of chiro's, I've been to them a lot. But with children, it's hard not to go just in case. My younger daughter was bitten by a spider once and we regret not taking her in sooner, she ended up with a huge bruise and fever.

99 times out of hundred it may be nothing big, but that 1 time could be a major regret.